• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Stake/Ward vs. Mission

Watchmen

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Another thread talked about the separate hierarchy between the state/ward and the mission. The mission has authority over baptisms for those aged 9+.

Question: Is it right the stake/ward leaders have almost no say in the baptisms of those 9+?

The reason I ask is that missions are often driven by numbers and will baptize people at almost any cost. I have seen many times were local leaders believe a person is NOT ready for baptism, but the mission dunks them anyway. What happens then? The person, not having a firm foundation, goes inactive shortly after baptism.

I'm probably in the minority on this, but it seems to me that bishops/stake leaders should have a trump card they can play. The issue is then resolved by the Bishop and the Mission Pres or one of his counselors. This might produce stronger converts. After all, we've upgraded the standards of the missionaries - why not upgrade the standards of the converts???
 
Katzpur

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
DisneyMan said:
I'm probably in the minority on this, but it seems to me that bishops/stake leaders should have a trump card they can play. The issue is then resolved by the Bishop and the Mission Pres or one of his counselors. This might produce stronger converts. After all, we've upgraded the standards of the missionaries - why not upgrade the standards of the converts???
Click to expand...
Sounds like a plan to me. :yes:
 
J

jonny

Well-Known Member
The "trump card" that Bishops can play is the confirmation. The mission has no control over when that occurs.
 
J

jonny

Well-Known Member
Katzpur said:
Sounds like a plan to me. :yes:
Click to expand...

I really wish they would "upgrade the standard" of converts. There are so many "former Mormons" and you know that 90% of them were not Mormon long enough to dry off from the baptism.
 
Worshipper

Worshipper

Active Member
DisneyMan said:
why not upgrade the standards of the converts???
Click to expand...
I can sympathize with you on this, but as I've thought about recently, I've come to think that perhaps the ordinances are more effective than we think they are. It might be better for someone to be baptized now, even if he never comes back to church in his life, than to be baptized after death. There might be more power in the ordinances themselves than we realize.

jonny said:
The "trump card" that Bishops can play is the confirmation. The mission has no control over when that occurs.
Click to expand...
I am not entirely certain, but am fairly confident that a bishop cannot block a confirmation. He might be able to prevent it from happening in a sacrament meeting, but I don't believe he can prevent it from happening. I believe the whether of the adult confirmation is entirely controlled by the mission and the new member, even if the when isn't.
 
zomg

zomg

I aim to misbehave!
As a missionary I always tried to respect the thoughts, comments, concerns, etc. that a bishop had about one of the people I was teaching.

Messing up missionary/ward relationships can have a lasting negative effect :( Thankfully, I always went into areas that good missionaries had been in.
 
Dream Angel

Dream Angel

Well-Known Member
DisneyMan said:
Another thread talked about the separate hierarchy between the state/ward and the mission. The mission has authority over baptisms for those aged 9+.

Question: Is it right the stake/ward leaders have almost no say in the baptisms of those 9+?

The reason I ask is that missions are often driven by numbers and will baptize people at almost any cost. I have seen many times were local leaders believe a person is NOT ready for baptism, but the mission dunks them anyway. What happens then? The person, not having a firm foundation, goes inactive shortly after baptism.
Click to expand...

I can vouch for that. I don't think my Bishop wanted me to get baptised really and is wife was especially surprised! I was quite shocked myself when they ask me. I literally had my first meeting with them the Thursday, they asked me the Sunday on my FIRST visit to Church and I was baptised two weeks later. Of course, in my missionaries defence - I was scaring them slightly with my knowledge gained from you guys!

Of course, I came back, but I think my Bishops wife still has doubts - her tone of voice on sunday when she asked "are you here to stay this time?"

DisneyMan said:
I'm probably in the minority on this, but it seems to me that bishops/stake leaders should have a trump card they can play. The issue is then resolved by the Bishop and the Mission Pres or one of his counselors. This might produce stronger converts. After all, we've upgraded the standards of the missionaries - why not upgrade the standards of the converts???
Click to expand...

I would agree with that! :yes:
 
Dream Angel

Dream Angel

Well-Known Member
Katzpur said:
What! How tactless! :(
Click to expand...

Yeah :shrug: I have had a couple of comments now which are not helping with me feeling guilty about leaving! I know some of them mean well...it is just probably coming out wrong. Doesnt help the way I feel though :( I have enough problems (well we are at the laugh about me going through a "phase" stage") at home, without the people at Church doubting me as well!

One of the ladies asked me how things at home were, I said not great (as far as Church was concerned), to which she replied "well I joined when I was 18, my parents disagreed and I am still here". I know she meant it well but it came across as "You shouldn't have left, I didn't!"

I just don't answer now, say everything is fine instead!
 
Katzpur

Katzpur

Not your average Mormon
Dream Angel said:
Yeah :shrug: I have had a couple of comments now which are not helping with me feeling guilty about leaving! I know some of them mean well...it is just probably coming out wrong. Doesnt help the way I feel though :( I have enough problems (well we are at the laugh about me going through a "phase" stage") at home, without the people at Church doubting me as well!

One of the ladies asked me how things at home were, I said not great (as far as Church was concerned), to which she replied "well I joined when I was 18, my parents disagreed and I am still here". I know she meant it well but it came across as "You shouldn't have left, I didn't!"

I just don't answer now, say everything is fine instead!
Click to expand...
It's hard to say what people's intentions are. With respect to the commend, "Well, I joined when I was 18. My parents disagreed and I am still here," I didn't find that particular one to be offensive (although, as I said before, I really was kind of bothered by the Bishop's wife's comment). I took this comment to mean, "Well, hang in there. I went through the same thing when I first joined the Church. I've managed to remain active in the Church in spite of my parents' objections, so it is possible."

Anyway, don't let them bother you. They'll let up once they know you're committed to being involved. :hug: One thing I have learned over the years is that you can't let the people you run into in the Church affect your activity. I didn't go to the Temple for close to 22 years after someone there offended me shortly after I got married. Once I finally went back, I realized how stupid I'd been to let some jerk keep me away.
 
despi

despi

Member
Watchmen said:
I was baptized 32 years ago. My husband was not happy with my decision to join the Church, so needless to say, I quit going after a couple of months to keep peace in the relationship. Now....was I truly converted since I stopped being active so quickly?....Would I have passed your definition of the "upgraded standard"?...probably not. I did truly feel converted to the Gospel all those years ago, but most certainly my testimony was not strong enough to have overcome the problems. The foundation I had then was a weak one. But does it not take awhile to build a truly strong and sure foundation, if not years...especially for us converts?

Yes Worshipper, I think there is more power in the ordinances themselves than we realize. I'm happy to say after all these years, that I have returned to the Church and my husband is being baptized next week!!!:woohoo: Heavenly Father works with His time table not ours.....we all must remember that. The love for the Gospel I felt years ago, really never left, and all it took was the right time, the right people and the right opportunity for it to resurface, and it took the right time for my husband to be ready to hear and understand the Gospel....even if it did take years. I'm thankful no one turned their thumbs down on the decision to baptize me all those years ago because I may never have had the opportunity again. At the very least, I did still feel like I was LDS, still connected....even if I wasn't active!!!! Now my husband and I are both anxiously awaiting to attend the temple in one year's time to be sealed for all eternity...and in my eyes that's a true miracle!!!

Dream Angel, hang in there. All is possible with the love from good, kind generous people, and the strength you receive from the scriptures, the Holy Spirit....and with lots of patience and prayer!!!!
Click to expand...
 
Dream Angel

Dream Angel

Well-Known Member
my husband is being baptized next week!!!:woohoo:
Click to expand...

:clap:clap2:

Dream Angel, hang in there. All is possible with the love from good, kind generous people, and the strength you receive from the scriptures, the Holy Spirit....and with lots of patience and prayer!!!!
Click to expand...

Thankyou - your post has given me hope!!! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top